Opioid use in medical cannabis authorization adult patients from 2013 to 2018: Alberta, Canada.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The opioid overdose epidemic in Canada and the United States has become a public health crisis - with exponential increases in opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Recently, there has been an increasing body of evidence focusing on the opioid-sparing effects of medical cannabis use (reduction of opioid use and reliance), and medical cannabis as a potential alternative treatment for chronic pain. The objective of this study is to assess the effect of medical cannabis authorization on opioid use (oral morphine equivalent; OME) between 2013 and 2018 in Alberta, Canada.Methods
All adult patients defined as chronic opioid users who were authorized medical cannabis by their health care provider in Alberta, Canada from 2013 to 2018 were propensity score matched to non-authorized chronic opioid using controls. A total of 5373 medical cannabis patients were matched to controls, who were all chronic opioid users. The change in the weekly average OME of opioid drugs for medical cannabis patients relative to controls was measured. Interrupted time series (ITS) analyses was used to assess the trend change in OME during the 26 weeks (6 months) before and 52 weeks (1 year) after the authorization of medical cannabis among adult chronic opioid users.Results
Average age was 52 years and 54% were female. Patients on low dose opioids (< 50 OME) had an increase in their weekly OME per week (absolute increase of 112.1 OME, 95% CI: 104.1 to 120.3); whereas higher dose users (OME > 100), showed a significant decrease over 6 months (- 435.5, 95% CI: - 596.8 to - 274.2) compared to controls.Conclusions
This short-term study found that medical cannabis authorization showed intermediate effects on opioid use, which was dependent on initial opioid use. Greater observations of changes in OME appear to be in those patients who were on a high dosage of opioids (OME > 100); however, continued surveillance of patients utilizing both opioids and medical cannabis is warranted by clinicians to understand the long-term potential benefits and any harms of ongoing use.
SUBMITTER: Lee C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8088205 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceOver the last 25 years, illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders have increased among US adults, and 28 states have passed medical marijuana laws (MML). Little is known about MML and adult illicit cannabis use or cannabis use disorders considered over time.ObjectiveTo present national data on state MML and degree of change in the prevalence of cannabis use and disorders.Design, participants, and settingDifferences in the degree of change between those living in MML states and other states were examined using 3 cross-sectional US adult surveys: the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES; 1991-1992), the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC; 2001-2002), and the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III; 2012-2013). Early-MML states passed MML between NLAES and NESARC ("earlier period"). Late-MML states passed MML between NESARC and NESARC-III ("later period").Main outcomes and measuresPast-year illicit cannabis use and DSM-IV cannabis use disorder.ResultsOverall, from 1991-1992 to 2012-2013, illicit cannabis use increased significantly more in states that passed MML than in other states (1.4-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .004), as did cannabis use disorders (0.7-percentage point more; SE, 0.3; P = .03). In the earlier period, illicit cannabis use and disorders decreased similarly in non-MML states and in California (where prevalence was much higher to start with). In contrast, in remaining early-MML states, the prevalence of use and disorders increased. Remaining early-MML and non-MML states differed significantly for use (by 2.5 percentage points; SE, 0.9; P = .004) and disorder (1.1 percentage points; SE, 0.5; P = .02). In the later period, illicit use increased by the following percentage points: never-MML states, 3.5 (SE, 0.5); California, 5.3 (SE, 1.0); Colorado, 7.0 (SE, 1.6); other early-MML states, 2.6 (SE, 0.9); and late-MML states, 5.1 (SE, 0.8). Compared with never-MML states, increases in use were significantly greater in late-MML states (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.6; P = .01), California (1.8-percentage point more; SE, 0.9; P = .04), and Colorado (3.5-percentage point more; SE, 1.5; P = .03). Increases in cannabis use disorder, which was less prevalent, were smaller but followed similar patterns descriptively, with change greater than never-MML states in California (1.0-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .06) and Colorado (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.8; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceMedical marijuana laws appear to have contributed to increased prevalence of illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders. State-specific policy changes may also have played a role. While medical marijuana may help some, cannabis-related health consequences associated with changes in state marijuana laws should receive consideration by health care professionals and the public.
| S-EPMC5539836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWith legal access to medical cannabis in Canada since 2001, there is a need to fully characterize its use at both the individual and population levels. We draw on data from Canada's largest cohort study of medical cannabis to identify the primary reasons for medical cannabis authorization in Canada from 2014 to 2019 in two major provinces: Alberta (AB) and Ontario (ON), and review the extent that evidence supports each indication.MethodsSelf-reported baseline assessments were collected from adult patients in ON (n = 61,835) and AB (n = 3410) who were authorized medical cannabis. At baseline, sociodemographic, primary medical information, and validated clinical questionnaires were completed by patients as part of an individual assessment. Patients' reasons for seeking medical cannabis were compared to published reviews and guidelines to assess the level of evidence supporting medical cannabis use for each condition.ResultsMedical cannabis use in both AB and ON was similar in both demographic and reason for authorization. The most common reasons for medical cannabis authorization were: (1) pain (AB = 77%, ON = 76%) primarily due to chronic musculoskeletal, arthritic, and neuropathic pain, (2) mental health concerns (AB = 32.9%, ON = 38.7%) due to anxiety and depression, and (3) sleep problems (AB = 28%, ON = 25%). More than 50 other conditions were identified as reasons for obtaining authorization.ConclusionIn both AB and ON, the majority of reasons for medical cannabis authorization are not substantiated by clinical evidence to fully support its efficacy for long-term use. Ongoing epidemiological studies on medical cannabis on these treatments are warranted to fully outline its treatment benefits or risks.
| S-EPMC8186125 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCanada was one of the first countries to regulate the medical use of cannabis. However, literature on Canada's medical cannabis program is limited.MethodsWe use administrative data from the medical cannabis program, and licensed cannabis vendor catalog data to describe a) the participation of patients, physicians, and cannabis vendors in the program from its inception in 1999 to 2021, and b) trends in medical cannabis consumption, prices and potency. We also use national surveys conducted over the last several decades to estimate trends in regular cannabis use (medical or otherwise) and how it changed during the medical cannabis access regimes.ResultsIn 2001, the Canadian government granted access to those with physician-documented evidence of a severe health problem that could not be managed using conventional therapies. Most patients accessed cannabis grown under a personal production license. By 2013, authorized daily cannabis dosages were very high. In 2014, the government, concerned over illegal diversion, required that cannabis be purchased from a licensed commercial grower; personal production was banned. Physicians were given responsibility for authorizing patient access. To fill the regulatory void, the physician regulatory bodies in Canada imposed their own prescribing restrictions. After these changes, the number of physicians who were willing to support patient cannabis use markedly decline but the number of patients participating in the program sharply increased. Medical cannabis use varied by province-rates were generally lower in provinces with stricter regulations on physician cannabis prescribing. Most varieties of cannabis oil available for sale are now high in CBD and low in THC. Dry cannabis varieties, conversely, tend to be high in THC and low in CBD. Inflation adjusted prices of most varieties of medical cannabis have declined over time. We find that rates of daily cannabis use (medical or otherwise) increased markedly after the 2014 policy regime. The fraction of Canadians using cannabis daily increased again after the 2018 legalization of recreational cannabis; at the same time, participation in the medical access program declined.ConclusionThe implications for patient health outcomes of changes in the medical cannabis program and legalization of recreational use remains an important area for future research.
| S-EPMC10035846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere has been a precipitous decline in authorizations for medical cannabis since non-medical cannabis was legalized in Canada in 2018. This study examines the demographic and health- and medical cannabis-related factors associated with authorization as well as the differences in medical cannabis use, side effects, and sources of medical cannabis and information by authorization status.MethodsIndividuals who were taking cannabis for therapeutic purposes completed an online survey in early 2022. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of demographic and health- and medical cannabis-related variables associated with holding medical cannabis authorization. The differences in medical cannabis use, side effects, and sources of information by authorization status were determined via t-tests and chi-squared analysis.ResultsA total of 5433 individuals who were currently taking cannabis for therapeutic purposes completed the study, of which 2941 (54.1%) currently held medical authorization. Individuals with authorization were more likely to be older (OR ≥ 70 years vs. < 30 years, 4.85 (95% CI, 3.49-6.76)), identify as a man (OR man vs. woman, 1.53 (1.34-1.74)), have a higher income (OR > $100,000/year vs. < $50,000 year, 1.55 (1.30-1.84)), and less likely to live in a small town (OR small town/rural vs. large city, 0.69 (0.59-0.81)). They were significantly more likely to report not experiencing any side effects (29.9% vs. 23.4%; p < 0.001), knowing the amount of cannabis they were taking (32.1% vs. 17.7%; p < 0.001), obtaining cannabis from regulated sources (74.1% vs. 47.5%; p < 0.001), and seeking information about medical cannabis from healthcare professionals (67.8% vs. 48.2%; p < 0.01) than individuals without authorization.ConclusionsThese findings offer insight into the possible issues regarding equitable access to medical cannabis and how authorization may support and influence individuals in a jurisdiction where recreational cannabis is legalized, highlighting the value of a formal medical cannabis authorization process.
| S-EPMC11003000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the United States, both cannabis use disorder (CUD) and opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased in prevalence. The prevalence, demographics, and costs of CUD and OUD are not well known in heart failure (HF) admissions. This study aimed to use a national database to examine the prevalence, demographics, and costs associated with CUD and OUD in HF.MethodsThis study used the National Inpatient Sample from 2008 to 2018 to identify all primary HF admissions with and without the co-diagnosis of OUD or CUD using International Classification for Diagnosis, diagnosis codes. Demographics, costs, and trends were examined.ResultsBetween 2008 and 2018, we identified 11,692,995 admissions for HF of which 84,796 (0.8%) had a co-diagnosis of CUD only, and 67,137 (0.6%) had a co-diagnosis of OUD only. The proportion of HF admissions with CUD significantly increased from 0.3% in 2008 to 1.3% in 2018 (p<0.001). The proportion of HF admissions with OUD significantly increased from 0.2% in 2008 to 1.1% in 2018 (p<0.001). Patients admitted with HF and either CUD or OUD were younger, more likely to be Black, and from lower socioeconomic backgrounds (p<0.001, all). HF admissions with OUD or CUD had higher median costs compared to HF admissions without associated substance abuse diagnoses ($8,611 vs. $8,337 for CUD HF and $10,019 vs. $8,337 for OUD HF, p<0.001 for both).ConclusionsAmong discharge records for HF, CUD and OUD are increasing in prevalence, significantly affect underserved populations and are associated with higher costs of stay. Future research is essential to better delineate the cause of these increased costs and create interventions, particularly in underserved populations.
| S-EPMC8483306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In response to the US opioid epidemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated their guideline on prescription opioids for chronic pain management in March 2016. The aim of this study was to provide detailed analysis of trends in opioid claims among cancer patients in the United States during 2013-2018. We analyzed pharmaceutical dispensing data from Symphony Health's Integrated Dataverse database, which covers approximately 80% of the US population. We examined annual trends in dispensed opioids in cancer patients during 2013-2018. We examined quarterly trends of the prevalence, mean number of days, and dose (stated as morphine milligram equivalents) of opioid dispensing in cancer patients. Dispensing records of an average of over 3.7 million cancer patients contributed to the study annually in 2013-2018. The annual prevalence of opioid dispensing claims declined from 40.2% in 2013 to 34.5% in 2018. Annual declines occurred across cancer sites, and particularly among patients with metastatic cancer (decline of 19.8%), breast cancer (18.2%), and lung cancer (13.8%). By quarter, the prevalence of opioid claims declined statistically significantly from 26.6% in Q1 2013 to 21.2% in Q4 2018; this decline was more pronounced after Q3 2016 (2-sided P = .004). Both quarterly trends in mean days and morphine milligram equivalents of opioids supplied showed a gradual decline from 2013 to 2018, with a slightly larger decline after 2016. We observed a decline in opioid use among cancer patients, particularly after 2016, coinciding with the publication of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's guideline on prescription opioids for chronic pain management.
| S-EPMC8793171 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION AND AIMS:Previous research suggested that cannabis use was associated with increased risks of prescription opioid misuse and use disorder. This study examined whether these associations differed by cannabis use purpose. DESIGN AND METHODS:This is a secondary analysis of cross-sectional surveys with propensity score matching. Medical cannabis users (N =?1295), cannabis dual users with both medical and non-medical purposes (N =?707) and non-medical cannabis users (N =?18?666) were compared with cannabis non-users (N =?57?196) in the pooled 2013-2016 US nationally representative National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Propensity score models were applied to match cannabis non-users to cannabis users with different purposes with respect to potential confounders in individual socioeconomic characteristics, other substance use disorders and health conditions. In a matched sample, logistic regressions were used to assess associations. RESULTS:Propensity score matching considerably improved the balance of the potential confounders between cannabis non-users and users. In a matched sample, non-medical cannabis use was associated with increased risks of prescription opioid misuse (OR = 3.15, 95%CI: 2.89-3.44) and use disorder (OR = 2.52, 95%CI: 2.06-3.10). Cannabis dual use and medical cannabis use were associated with increased risks of prescription opioid misuse (OR = 2.55, 95%CI: 1.78-3.65; OR = 2.15, 95%CI: 1.58-2.91, respectively), but they were not associated with prescription opioid use disorder. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:Medical and non-medical cannabis use both were both associated with increased risks of prescription opioid misuse. Medical cannabis use, however, was not associated with prescription opioid use disorder, and non-medical cannabis was. There appeared to be differential associations between cannabis use and prescription opioid use disorder by cannabis use purpose.
| S-EPMC6774839 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if inappropriate tapering/discontinuation of opioids to Alberta patients occurred from mid-2013-2020, as unintended consequences of prescribing guidelines, regulations and policies in response to the North American opioid crisis.DesignA population-based, repeated cross-sectional time-series study.SettingAlberta, Canada.ParticipantsResidents of Alberta, Canada aged 18 and older who received an opioid dispense from a community pharmacy from 2013 to 2020.Main outcome measuresThe prevalence of potential rapid tapering was measured at a given date (reference day), enveloped by a data window. Dose changes were measured as oral morphine equivalents (OME) per patient, at multiple time points ('data window' around a reference day). Chronic recipients were identified, and their prescriptions were contrasted 90 days before and after the reference day to measure OME/day changes.ResultsApproximately 9000 dispenses (totalling ~6 million OME) per day were analysed from 2013 to 2020. The total number of opioid recipients was highly cyclic in nature (peaking in winter). The number of chronic opioid recipients remained somewhat stable from ~70K in 2013 to ~86K at the end of 2020. The number of chronic high and very high dose recipients presented a significant decrease after 2017. Approximately 11%-12% of chronic high-dose recipients experienced potential rapid dose tapering at a rate of 50% or more prereference to postreference day at any given point of time. For chronic very high dose recipients, approximately 11.5% experience potential rapid dose tapering at a rate of 50% or more prereference to postreference day at any given point of time. Potential discontinuation remained constant and the interventions did not have a significant impact on the trend.ConclusionThe evidence suggests that changes in prescribing guidelines were not associated with an increase of rapid opioid tapering/discontinuation in Alberta.
| S-EPMC10603432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCannabis is increasingly used for therapeutic purpose. However, its safety profile is not well known. This study assessed the risk of cardiovascular-related emergency department (ED) visit and hospitalization in adult patients authorized to use medical cannabis in Ontario, Canada from 2014 to 2017.MethodsThis is a longitudinal cohort study of patients who received medical cannabis authorization and followed-up in cannabis clinics, matched to population-based controls. The primary outcome was an ED visit or hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or stroke; and secondary outcome was for any cardiovascular event. Conditional Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the association between cannabis authorization and risk.Results18,653 cannabis patients were matched to 51,243 controls. During a median follow-up of 242 days, the incidence rates for ACS or stroke were 7.19/1000 person-years and 5.67/1000 person-years in the cannabis and controls group, respectively- adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 1.44 (95% CI 1.08-1.93). When stratified by sex, the association was only statistically significant among males: aHR 1.77 (1.23-2.56). For the secondary outcome (any CV events), the aHR was 1.47 (1.26-1.72). The aHR among males and females were 1.52 (1.24-1.86) and 1.41 (1.11-1.79), respectively. Tested interaction between cannabis authorization and sex was not significant (p > 0.05).ConclusionsMedical cannabis authorization was associated with an increased risk of ED visits or hospitalization for CV events including stroke and ACS.
| S-EPMC8431905 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RationaleThere has been increasing attention on cannabis use for medical purposes, but there is currently a lack of data on its epidemiology.ObjectivesTo examine the epidemiology of self-reported cannabis use for medical purposes by (1) estimating its prevalence, (2) comparing gender and age differences, and (3) investigating what reasons they were used to manage.MethodsParticipants included 27,169 respondents (aged 16-65) who completed Wave 1 of The International Cannabis Policy Study (ICPS) conducted across Canada and the USA in 2018 via online surveys. Cannabis policy conditions were "US legal-recreational" (legal for both recreational and medical uses), "US legal-medical only", "US illegal", and "Canada-medical only".ResultsThe overall prevalence of self-reported ever cannabis use for medical purposes was 27%, with similar rates by sex and the highest prevalence in young adults. Prevalence was higher in US legal-recreational states (34%) than US illegal states (23%), US legal-medical only states (25%), and Canada (25%). The most common physical health reasons include use to manage pain (53%), sleep (46%), headaches/migraines (35%), appetite (22%), and nausea/vomiting (21%). For mental health reasons, the most common were for anxiety (52%), depression (40%), and PTSD/trauma (17%). There were 11% who reported using cannabis for managing other drug or alcohol use and 4% for psychosis.ConclusionsA substantial proportion of the North American population self-reported cannabis use for medical purposes for a variety of medical reasons, including those living in jurisdictions without legal markets. Further research is needed to understand the safety and efficacy of these forms of medical cannabis use.
| S-EPMC9110511 | biostudies-literature